Hugh MacLeod considers the difficult time some journalists have had coming to terms with blogs.
As I’m fond of saying, blogs are good for making things happen indirectly etc.
But journalists seem to have a problem getting their head around it. “Indirectly” is too foreign to them. They’re too used to living in the “directly” universe: Wake up. Commute to office. Write stuff. Take abuse from Editor. Collect meagre paycheck. Go home. Complain to long-suffering spouse about abusive Editor and meagre paycheck. Go to bed, sleep, wake up and repeat etc.
That’s not what blogging is about, guys. Blogging, at its best, is about freeing yourself from that crap.
I’m beginning to loathe the word “blog” becasue everyone has their own unique definition for it. How can we effectively communicate if we all have our own meaning for words?
Hugh has found blogging to be liberating. Many others find it to be a dead end. And others find a comfortable place somewhere in between these extremes. Bottom line, there’s no one definition for blog. Nor will there be anytime soon.
